Hill as Trustee for the Ashmore Superannuation Benefit Fund v Halo Architectural Design Services Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 878

Hill as Trustee for the Ashmore Superannuation Benefit Fund v Halo Architectural Design Services Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 878

The solicitor's unsolicited filing of costs submissions before judgment was delivered was inappropriate and contrary to the obligations reflected in Solicitors Rules r 23 art 56 and Bar Rule 53, but her explanation and apology were accepted, so no further action or referral was necessary.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Rulings / Show Cause Concerning Unsolicited Communication With the Court After Judgment Had Been Reserved
Outcome
Cause shown; the Court did not consider it necessary to take the matter any further.
Legal Topics
['communications With the Court' 'duty to Opponent' 'costs Submissions' 'solicitors Rules R 23 Art 56' 'bar Rule 53']
['procedure' 'legal Profession'] ['communications With the Court' 'duty to Opponent' 'costs Submissions' 'solicitors Rules R 23 Art 56' 'bar Rule 53']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Procedural and Other Rulings / Show Cause Concerning Unsolicited Communication With the Court After Judgment Had Been Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether it was appropriate for the plaintiffs' solicitor to send unsolicited costs submissions to the Court after judgment had been reserved and before judgment was delivered." 'Whether the solicitor should be referred to the Law Society for communicating with the Court concerning a matter of substance without prior consent or direction.']

Ratio Decidendi

The solicitor's unsolicited filing of costs submissions before judgment was delivered was inappropriate and contrary to the obligations reflected in Solicitors Rules r 23 art 56 and Bar Rule 53, but her explanation and apology were accepted, so no further action or referral was necessary.

Court Disposition

Cause shown; the Court did not consider it necessary to take the matter any further.

Orders

  • []